Max Weber & Modernity: Crash Course Sociology #9
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ก.ย. 2024
- This week we are wrapping up our overview of sociology’s core frameworks and founding theorists with a look Max Weber and his understanding of the modern world. We’ll explore rationalization and the transition from traditional to modern society. We’ll also discuss bureaucracy, legitimacy, and social stratification in the modern state. Finally, we’ll see why Weber was so worried about the modern world.
Crash Course is made with Adobe Creative Cloud. Get a free trial here: www.adobe.com/...
***
Crash Course is on Patreon! You can support us directly by signing up at / crashcourse
Thanks to the following Patrons for their generous monthly contributions that help keep Crash Course free for everyone forever:
Mark, Les Aker, Bob Kunz, Mark Austin, William McGraw, Jeffrey Thompson, Ruth Perez, Jason A Saslow, Eric Prestemon, Malcolm Callis, Steve Marshall, Advait Shinde, Rachel Bright, Ian Dundore, Tim Curwick, Ken Penttinen, Dominic Dos Santos, Caleb Weeks, Frantic Gonzalez, Kathrin Janßen, Nathan Taylor, Yana Leonor, Andrei Krishkevich, Brian Thomas Gossett, Chris Peters, Kathy & Tim Philip, Mayumi Maeda, Eric Kitchen, SR Foxley, Tom Trval, Andrea Bareis, Moritz Schmidt, Jessica Wode, Daniel Baulig, Jirat
--
Want to find Crash Course elsewhere on the internet?
Facebook - / youtubecrashcourse
Twitter - / thecrashcourse
Tumblr - / thecrashcourse
Support Crash Course on Patreon: / crashcourse
CC Kids: / crashcoursekids
Anyone else here after trying to read a textbook or essay on modernity and crying?
Yeah 🤣
Yes😂
yup
Me lol
for sociology class
I swear these videos are running on 2x speed holy moley
this is one of the only CC series that get me so engaged and interested in what the narrator is teaching that by the time the video ends, i've been so enthralled by the information that I don't realize 10+ min have passed already. And then I just crave moreeee lol
"And then there are those who can turn their fame or status into political power." Hahaha!
I noted the resignation and despair in her voice when she said that line.
Christopher Canon the first thing I thought of was Pacquiao
Subtle message sent to the future.
I don't know much about Pacquaio and what he does, but I don't think he's that influential anyway, right? He doesn't have some kind of special agenda.
Although I'm curious, what did Pacquaio do to be qualified for his job? What I mean is, what would a person do to be qualified for his job? Can anyone become.. a Senator? He's a Senator, right?
I think who she was referring to was Trump, right? How can Americans say they like him when he's one of the elites of the corporate world? Do they really think an elite represents most Americans?
my favorite classical sociologist so far!
THESE VIDEOS got me through my 200, and 300 level classes thank you !!
Crash Course will never cease being a valuable asset during exams for me.
Thank you for summarizing and analyzing such lengthy texts! Your entire team honestly deserves a reward for how much you’ve helped my peers and I over the years.
that was absolutely AMAZING. Seriously, you got a new subscriber for life.
This deserve more likes and views... Great work
Rick's Portal gun doesn't do time travel so they traveled to an alternate universe where humanity never progressed past the middle ages in Europe?
televisionblitz probably
televisionblitz it took them to a medieval themed park developed by the Delos Corporation.
televisionblitz Yeah, I was very disappointed in that shameless attempt to relate to the viewers. Boo.
It hasn't been confirmed that the portal gun wouldn't allow for time travel, and logically the amount of energy to open a wormhole to another dimension would be on a similar scale to that needed for time travel. We just haven't seen them do it yet. Also, the characters are a goof on Doc and Marty from Back to the Future so there's a good chance they'll do time travel eventually.
thanks for subtitles
Would it be correct to say that when Rationality loses its Reflexivity it turns into Tradition? For eg. The beureaocratic system of China was extremely rational but was also traditional because of its lack of Reflexivity and reliance on 'how it has always been done'.
First, I love the series and have enjoyed it so far. However, considering the plausibility of Weber's theory I'm not quite sure how well the phenomena of modernity holds up on the global sociological scale. It applies well to the West and Europe, however, Eastern Asian cultures and Latin American cultures functioned differently. Especially on the grounds of the bureaucracy as was mentioned in this video. Before even the fall of Rome, the Han Dynasty in China had already created a massive bureaucracy that made early industrial bureaucracies seem laughable. Also, in the Inca civilization in South America, Incan socialism also created a wide government apparatus that functioned beyond a centralized government, and instead as a wider imperial bureaucracy that managed the civilizations resources. Weber's theories apply well to the West and industrialization, however many of the elements of modernity and social apparatus' were created before the West even became a concept. The theory of modernity still holds well in the West, but I thought it might be important to look outside of it. Love the show.
I too am enjoying the series, but realise that much of the thinkers and theories are coming from the 'West' and the historical context of the industrial revolution. I wonder what the sociological perspective on imperialism and colonialsim is.
Weber didn't only write about bureaucracy in the modern west, one of the main ideas he came up with were the 3 ideal types of domination, which were legal-rational (bureaucracy is associated with this one), traditional and charismatic, these ideal types in their pure states exist only in theory as reality is always more complicated and may mix more than one, these ideal types are used to help shed some light as you look into any given human group, also don't expect to know a lot about his theories in a 10 minute video, as there is much more than could possibly fit just one video
Cameron Waltz Weber was well aware of the ancient Chinese state. He wrote extensively on Indian and Chinese social and political systems and religion. I don't think he was as knowledgable about the Incans. My memory is a little faulty, but I remember he discounted these ancient forms of bureaucracy as different in kind to modern Western variety that allowed Europe technocratic edge over all other societies. Remember how a theorist or school of thought defines a term can be quite different to a words general usage - for example Weber's 'rationality' is different to its common English usage. He was a dense and prolific writer who needs more examination than a short video that briefly introduces his key ideas.
This is a great comment. This video is more about the Western solution to bureaucracy and how that evolved in its history.
Loving the quality of these TH-cam comments
For those who like this analysis of how/why society changed over time, I recommend James Burke's "Connections". To me it is more compelling than the single paradigm shift expoused here.
PLEASE DO AN EPISODE ON THE STRUCTURE AND FUNCTION OF THE FAMILY AND THE DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES
I love intelligent people who thinks about "sources of things"!
Thanks!
Weber is absolutely correct. We do forget or lose track of why we do things the way we do. Such a simple solution is to teach the new generation Why instead of leaving them to question. q:
These crash course videos help me alot now that i have to take 2 exams again, cause i flunked the first time.
Could you talk about anarchism in one of your future episodes please?
> Not about gender/sex
> Not about race
> Like/dislike ratio returns to average
Hmmmmmmmmm.....
> Sociology regarded as science again
> TH-cam gets green text
> Nihilism
You do realize the first 6 episodes had nothing to do with gender, sex or race, and people still trolled and downvoted. So there is basically a very weak correlation between ideas about sex, gender and race and trolling sociology videos. Further more popularity does not determine whether a video is true or informative, in fact the clear evidence that people desire to stop others from speaking freely about those topics might actually show the need to discuss them.
Great work. Well done to all who contributed to it's creation.
I love all of these sociology videos! Make more please!
This was beautiful, thanks for posting.
This is helping me in my social science class, so thank you 🙏🏻
props to you for pronouncing Weber quite well and for this interesting episode!
SOMEONE PLS RESPOND AND HELP!!
I just don’t understand bureaucracy. If we don’t have a say in anything a bureaucracy sets, then aren’t we just back in a traditional society as all we do is follow? I.e. like the church? Or is the church a form of bureaucracy?? Ahhhh just a lil confused ahaha! Any help differentiating and helping explain a bureaucracy and how it relates to society today and rationalism would be a big help!
Thank you enjoy your day :)
Great lecture...plz plz upload more and more and more videos
"The only thing that saves us from the bureaucracy is its inefficiency"
There is a certain irony to that while John Calvin’s predestination ideas have been used to endorse capitalism, the Reformed doctrine (descendants of Dutch Calvinists) has largely turned toward a more social justice action and conservation.
This was a pretty good video.
Very good! Great class!
This was SO helpful! 😩🙌🏾
Two things:
1) It's pretty condescending to think that modernity or Protestantism "invented" rationalism. Industrialisation did boom some time after the renaissance (mostly because of the discovery of widespread coal deposits), but industrial processes have been in constant evolution all over the world throughout history. The water-wheel, the printing press, the standardization of language and adoption of effective trade routes and relationships have always existed. In the middle ages, the most powerful coalition in europe elected its emperor from among the nobility. It was not a birth right but rather a rational decision made by those who held land and had influence. It's pretty easy to look to the past and imagine whoever lived there to be subhuman in their reasoning, and to imagine whichever change was the one just before us to have been the most important in history. I think that the internet is the biggest thing. My dad thinks the computer and its capacity for limitless calculations is. My grandmother thinks it's the social secularization and my great grandparents might have thought it was the electricity. But when you open a book, be it Plato's republic, or Cicero, or Doyle's Sherlock Holmes or Machiavelli's "The Prince", you find this same rationalism everywhere. Human nature did not fundamentally change at any point in history; or at least not the nature of those with an IQ > 120. The 'nature' of those people suffering from low status, low intelligence, and low education is hard to comment on because they left few traces of their existence on earth; but I doubt that they have _ever_ been rational, even today. They have always accepted things "because that's the way things are", and have always attempted to thrive in the context given to them by those of high _status_ (regardless of class), without attempting to change it.
2) It's the first time I'm exposed to the notion that class and status can be two different things, and I have to say it's an extremely enlightening idea, which explains a lot of the political shifts through history. Basically, class is wealth and legal privilege. Status is talent, intelligence, creativity, capacity to persuade others, capacity to enforce your beliefs, etc. The dumbfounded son of a rich man who cares only about women and cars has high class, low status. The monk who lives like a pauper but whose words are heeded by his whole community has low class, high status. The poor kid who gets accepted into university and gets his doctorate in medicine to then discover antibiotics and revolutionize society has average class, maximum status. The man who is able to edit wikipedia and change the first impression of millions of people as to a given topic has very high status, regardless of his actual class. Social class is the ability to control resources within the matrix of society, and social status is the ability to influence the matrix of society itself. In either case, you're born with a given class, and born with a given status; the big difference is that you can improve your class, but can almost never improve your status beyond your intellectual capacity. Viewed in this light, history reveals both struggles of class _and_ struggles of status, with the proletariat who has neither class nor status being crushed underneath. Those of high class and low status tend to be conservative (e.g. Hereditary fortunes), and they attempt to prevent high-status groups from taking away their privilege. Those of high class and high status tend to be elitists and liberals (e.g. Voltaire, Clinton, Renaissance popes), who have contempt for tradition, but also for the masses. Those of low status and low class tend to be socialists, revolutionaries, and humanists (e.g. Jesus Christ, Che Guevara), who want to abolish class systems altogether because they perceive no benefits in them, their whole strength being status. Those of low class and low status tend to be populists (Pol Pot, Stalin), who would abolish classes, but are also hostile to status; they generally become the new conservatives after their revolution, or are manipulated by other alignements to participate into something that isn't to their advantage.
Hey, it was a good episode that didn't make me angry! woo.
IT'S RIIIIIIICK
00:09
Good presentation and conclusive view at last within so short time
The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the rising needs of the expanding bureaucracy.
The 'iron cage' was a mistranslation of 'iron housing': the external casing of a machine.
Probably because now we're allowed to think and say what we're thinking without being killed
Great overview. Thx! 🙏
All this seems to be in Europe. What about the rest of the world? I mean, those 3 things you mentioned were found in the rest of the world, and ironically were lost in pursuit of a Western-style "Modernization"
The Muslim Comb that's usually one of the critics that people give to Weber. But he introduced a new way to do sociology (which is essentially the opposite of Emile Durkheim)
Modernity is a concept directly surrounding empires that were connected to the Catholic church before the Protestant Reformation. Yes, other places have organizations of their own but that doesn't change the root of Modernity. This concept really begins after the fall of Constantinople to the Ottomans in 1453 that push fleeing Greek intellectuals and artisans into western Europe. Some would say that move is what pushed the Italian Renaissance but classical modernity is associated with the French revolution and enlightenment. Naturally, it took a different form in South Africa, then it did in the Central or Western Europe. Technology played a large role in how ideas where shared. China, for example, had printing presses long before western Europe. However, colonialization did spread these ideas as well.
Im weak lmao they put those dank shades on priest when they said he denounced corruption in the church.
3:14
cheers ! awesome video I am so grateful !
Excellent!
If you guys prefer hank or John or whatever his name is more you should put the speed at 1.25 I mean is it even crash course if you can decipher what the person is saying
do you think the difference in thinking between "traditional" and "modern" societies has anything to do with the slow increase of people over the age of fifty in the general population as medicine, hygiene, and food safety improved?
Eh, I dunno.
Certain new ways of thinking can only stick, if the surrounding circumstances allow for it.
Txs god, beautiful teacher and intertening video.. Who needs more..
💜💜💜🙃
0:10 God damn , Rick used his portal gun again....
Here in PA we vote twice a year, every year....are there places that dont?
Oh, how I wish every video in this series had sources to read. Small bites are not enough, at least for me.
woooww, weber said something that I knew for so long, and I'm only so young :D
What makes sense about Weber’s explanation for the rise of capitalism in Western nations?
6:53 in the US we should be going to the polls EVERY YEAR at the VERY LEAST!!!!!!
Did you take Jonathan's class?
Can course replace all teachers? it would take my teacher an entire week to teach this.
Damn, Weber is the first sociologist i find spot on
One could argue that Max Weber's nightmares about Modernity have already came true, and I wouldn't disagree. I will, in fact, do so: Perceived social standards put us into jobs that we find very not-meaningful and not-enjoyable, even though social standards were probably supposed to be loose guidelines. To keep up with his "Iron cage" analogy, the cage was partially molten, and could be escaped without much effort, but, over time, it cooled and hardened, and the harder it is, the less easily you can escape. I'm sorry if this wasn't as eloquent as you wanted; it certainly wasn't for me...
You teaches very good. It's a humble request plz speak slowly
I really enjoy CC episodes and find them really informative. However, the primarily white European/American view restricts wider understanding of the subject. I have noticed this not only in this series but in the others as well, where any theories or contributions by other races and nationalities have been ignored.
Clearly, the mythology (anthropology) Crash Course is sexier. Why sociologists can't picture a fun, charming and interesting sociology?
hi - i reaaaaally need some sources for what you're saying here for an essay. i have a lot of learning difficulties and watch these crash courses to understand the basics of a theory so i can read things easier, and i now understand a lot of weber and want to add in his theory about the sense of self and the expereince of human kind changing with modernity - but i cant find anny books that address it ? please source your videos, it would be so helpful.
I don't think you can find anything in Calvin's work that indicates he thought that monetary success is proof of salvation. Can you source this?
Um... Aren't we supposed to listen to symbolic interactionism here? The video was great but I felt like something was missing
oh thanks for turkish subtitle
I'm sort, we are not truly modern yet because a lot of people still got traditionalism way of thinking? 😕
Can we get a world history on Indian Pakistan conflict on Jammu-Kasmir
i was going to say "plumbing/sanitation" in response to the first question, but I'm a plumbing engineer so i might be biased.
how come the captions are wrong?
Nice cameo by Rick Sanchez at 0:10
Is there somebody can explain the meaning of calculability? I'm really puzzled.
Yay!
Pretty cool
The subtitles are so late someone should fix it.
Not all political leaders are charismatic leaders. There are several forms of leadership in Weber's theories: legal/democratic, charismatic and traditional. Weber, having in the back of his head the thought of "eherne Gehäuse der Hörigkeit" (the total emotionless rule of bureaucracy over people and the logical end of the process of rationalization , which he was afraid of) only suggests that to counter it, leaders should be charismatic leaders. He did not expect and know of Hitler's rise to power a few years later, which most definitely was a charismatic one.
Money.
Power.
Respect.
Thank You
Dear Madam, Your arguments, style, content, cinematography etc. are perfect. But you speak so fast that we can't understand many things. Can you please reduce the speeeeed of your speech.
I played the video at speed 0.75 and paused every bit haha
no rewind it. the videos being short is the beauty of it
You should set the playback speed :D
If Calvin was alive to meet Paris Hilton...
"God's Plan"
Nice video, but the pace is way too quick for the viewer to think and reflect what has been said.
No Calvinist ever believed their accumulation of wealth or worldly success was a sign they were saved. That's absolutely absurd. They found assurances of salvation in many other ways.
can you upload epi 14 again pls
That Rick and Morty reference though.
And after 97 years I found the Szechuan sauce. Cool
Weber thinks that a modern society that lacks reflection will blindly follow the rules given to it forever, without question - but that could be said about his traditional societies, as well. And they didn't last forever...
The framing of this videos topic is so hopelessly Western in it's bias.
The motive thought of Hinduism and Buddhism and indeed the evidence we have of ancient lost religions show us that people we're not only aspiring to be natural before modernity set upon us.
Like children you adopt an authoritative tone never realizing that every adults who ever did was it hypocrite.
Further you seem to ignore the real meaning of natural. We know that no man is an island and so it is also true that no organism lives apart from every other organism in its environment. To ignore the nature of things is to ignore reality.
i do not want to live in a society after taking sociology 401
"Weber worried that the systems that rationalisation built will leave behind the ideas that built them and that they'll simply roll on forever, meaninglessly, under their own momentum. He worried that we'll become locked in what he called an 'iron cage of bureaucratic capitalism' from which we can't escape. Our lives will become nothing but a series of interactions based on rationalised rules, with no personal meaning behind them." Well that was scarily prophetic of him, Jesus...
Wait til he sees the robots.
I honestly don't bother. Better than living at his time.
Kafka was pretty Weberian.
Should a machine not function upon striking the panel marked "on" this is an omen of great ill. The reasons ascribed may be as follows. Firstly, the function of inadequate preparation on the part of the operator. Secondly, the action of the machine whose spirit may refuse the binding of the operator. Thirdly, the malintent of some third party upon the operator or machine. The operator must repeat the ritual from the beginning re-purifying himself, enscribing the runes, intoning the incantations, and striking the panel marked 'on'. An accompanying oath may be made. Should this procedure fail, the operator must recourse to consulting the instruction manual - Book of the Astronomicon
I was going to skip your comment, but then I read the last word on it.
"Just keep firing, Morty. They're all just robots, Morty"
"I don't know, Rick, they aren't acting like robots"
"it's a figure of speech, Morty, they're bureaucrats, Morty"
Just a reminder that rational does not mean good/right.
Found the commie
Excellent, you are absolutely right
It means actually thinking about what you are doing to achieve an end instead of blindly following the traditions. Though according to weber it also means blindly following the bureocratical rules.
@@JM-fo1te Found the douchie.
This series is so good it should have no end and go on forever as long as there is internet.
Tip: put on 0.75 speed to actually *hear* what she says
「 DJ Ambient 」 honestly. Crash course videos are always so fast and I always have to slow them down and pause to take in what they’re saying
Tip, put on speed on 2 for 30 seconds then go back to normal so you actually hear what she says
Thank you! I love her but these crash courses are a bit too fast
Finished watching this in x1.75 speed only to find people have problems following it in normal speed.
Think I have a problem lol
I had to speed it up to keep my interest
Portal !! They Have the portal damn it rick!
Abdullah Şimşek They've got the portal gun. Rick and morty lovers will love this video 😄
I have a sociology test tomorrow and your videos literally saved my 50% of the grade
Sociology is the subject i didn't know i wanted. I'm glad school didn't ruin it for me. Thanks Crash Course :)
I love the phrase "Human Construct".
When told things I 'have' to do in life, I question why. Like go to college, work 40 hours/week, retire at 65, ect. All of those are just human constructs that aren't a requirement for living your life. I just want to live a life where I'm not in debt forever.
Considering the wide range of topics Weber was interested in, I'm impressed by how well they managed to seamlessly tie together so many of his interests into one ten minute video! Also, Habermas is pronounced like H-ah-bermas, not like H-ai-bermas.
Oof... I've *read* it so many times that it didn't even occur to me to double check a pronunciation guide on this one. Unfortunately, we've filmed a couple more episodes that mention him, so prepare to laugh at me and my poor pronunciation a little more in the weeks ahead.
Well you can only do the best you can! It's understandable. My adviser in my Sociology department is German, so he makes sure I know all the correct pronunciations of German sociologists. The one thing German sociologists have in common is their weird hard to pronounce names!
That's facinating to hear tbh?? I'm a german sociology student, so the only name that has given me trouble so far has been Du Bois (I still pronounce it the french way inside my head). What names do you think are hard to pronounce??
Mostly its just that the names are pronounced differently than you would expect at first glance. Weber isn't pronounced with the W sound like you might expect for example. Names like, Niklas Luhmann, Claus Offe, Herbert Marcuse, and György Lukács (not German, but still hard to pronounce!) are not all straightforward in their pronunciation!
Man I really love this series and appreciate the work you guys are doing! Thanx
ditto!
Suddenly "capitalism is rational" and the comments are all calm. What ever happened here?
Sloth7d because it's the truth
The truth is quite soothing
They thought it was a compliment when in truth, it is the basis for many a withering critique of capitalism.
Didn't Weber predicted that? Also, Marx too?
It's "rational" but it's also "hyper-rational"
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Power takes many forms and changes in value based on contextual needs. For example: It's very rare for a president to be selected because of individual powers such as charisma, or personal traits. I assert that it's the power behind the individual that determines the selection. Trump is one of those rare exceptions where the power was given to him by citizens rather than by the power base that typically controls choice and therefore outcomes in order to preserve established power.
May I ask for the book sources or references of where you got the following in the part of the video where you introduced the ideas of John Calvin?:
1. that the point of life was no longer that it was divinely appointed and that it became a matter of how well, or how much you worked
2. the idea that success is the proof of election
3. wealth proved you were saved